Wiki-research-l

wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org

8 participants
2988 discussions

Brief unavailability scheduled for the Event Logging database replica
by Luca Toscano 26 Sep '18

26 Sep '18

Hi everybody, Tomorrow Sept 27th at 10 CEST db1108 (alias analytics-slave) will be down for a brief (max 30 mins) maintenance (Mariadb and Linux kernel upgrade). This means that the log database will not be available for querying during this time frame. Please reach out to me or to the Analytics team if this impacts your work (elukey or #wikimedia-analytics on IRC Freenode). Thanks! Luca

1 0

Re: [Wiki-research-l] [Wikidata] Semantic annotation of red links on Wikipedia
by 80hnhtv4agou＠bk.ru 25 Sep '18

25 Sep '18

All that red makes the page look bad, and i would like to point out the abuse factor here, all those red links start edit wars, and should be put there if any by people, The creation of the wikidata page also creats a problem, because it does not establis a lable which should be mandatory and in english, in the save proses. and this problem * https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Labels_and_descriptions#… >Tuesday, September 25, 2018 2:58 AM -05:00 from Sergey Leschina <mail(a)putnik.ws>: > >I want to draw your attention to the problem from the other side. On the newly created page, which can be opened by the red link, there is no binding to the Wikidata. This means that after the creation, the page will not automatically be linked to the Wikidata. And if the project has templates that can use information from the Wikidata, they will not fully work until the page will be saved at least once and linked to an item. I already suggested to add the parameter for this: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T178249 > >If something like this will be implemented, then it will be possible to make a template for the red links (with Lua and TemplateStyles) that will be connected to the Wikidata. Although I agree that it is better to have a syntax that will allow to make links without such difficulties. >пн, 24 сент. 2018 г. в 20:50, Maarten Dammers < maarten(a)mdammers.nl >: >>Hi everyone, >> >>According to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLuM4E6IE5U : "Semantic >>annotation is the process of attaching additional information to various >>concepts (e.g. people, things, places, organizations etc) in a given >>text or any other content. Unlike classic text annotations for reader's >>reference, semantic annotations are used by machines to refer to." >>(more at >>https://ontotext.com/knowledgehub/fundamentals/semantic-annotation/ ) >> >>On Wikipedia a red link is a link to an article that hasn't been created >>(yet) in that language. Often another language does have an article >>about the subject or at least we have a Wikidata item about the subject. >>Take for example >>https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Friedrich_Ris . It has over >>250 incoming links, but the person doesn't have an article in Dutch. We >>have a Wikidata item with links to 7 Wikipedia's at >>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q116510 , but no way to relate >>https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Friedrich_Ris with >>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q116510 . >> >>Wouldn't it be nice to be able to make a connection between the red link >>on Wikipedia and the Wikidata item? >> >>Let's assume we have this list somewhere. We would be able to offer all >>sorts of nice features to our users like: >>* Hover of the link to get a hovercard in your favorite backup language >>* Generate an article placeholder for the user with basic information in >>the local language >>* Pre-populate the translate extension so you can translate the article >>from another language >>(probably plenty of other good uses) >> >>Where to store this link? I'm not sure about that. On some Wikipedia's >>people have tested with local templates around the red links. That's not >>structured data, clutters up the Wikitext, it doesn't scale and the >>local communities generally don't seem to like the approach. That's not >>the way to go. Maybe a better option would be to create a new property >>on Wikidata to store the name of the future article. Something like >>Q116510: Pxxx -> (nl)"Friedrich Ris". Would be easiest because the >>infrastructure is there and you can just build tools on top of it, but >>I'm afraid this will cause a lot of noise on items. A couple of >>suggestions wouldn't be a problem, but what is keeping people from >>adding the suggestion in 100 languages? Or maybe restrict the usage that >>a Wikipedia must have at least 1 (or n) incoming links before people are >>allowed to add it? >>We could create a new projects on the Wikimedia Cloud to store the >>links, but that would be quite the extra time investment setting up >>everything. >> >>What do you think? >> >>Maarten >> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Wikidata mailing list >>Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata > > >-- >Sergey Leschina >_______________________________________________ >Wikidata mailing list >Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org >https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

1 0

Analytics Hadoop cluster full shutdown scheduled for Sept 25th
by Luca Toscano 25 Sep '18

25 Sep '18

Hi everybody, the Analytics team needs to replace the Hadoop master node hosts (analytics100[1,2]) and the Hive/Oozie host (analytics1003) as part of regular hardware refresh (hosts getting out of warranty). In order to do things safely we decided to proceed with a full cluster shutdown on Sept 25th at 10 AM CEST. The maintenance should last a couple of hours and all there shouldn't be any noticeable change for the Hadoop users. This means that during the maintenance: - HDFS will not be available - Yarn will not be available - Hive/Spark (cluster mode)/Oozie/etc.. will not be available Please let us know if this impacts your work in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T203635 or on the #wikimedia-analytics Freenode IRC channel. Thanks a lot! Luca

1 2

Upcoming Research Newsletter: New Papers Open For Review
by Mohammed Sadat Abdulai 23 Sep '18

23 Sep '18

Hi everyone, We’re preparing for the August 2018 research newsletter and looking for contributors. Please take a look at https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/WRN201808 and add your name next to any paper you are interested in covering. Our target publication date is on September 28 UTC although actual publication might happen several days later. As usual, short notes and one-paragraph reviews are most welcome. Highlights from this month: - "Sharing Small Pieces of the World": Increasing and Broadening Participation in Wikimedia Commons - A Wikia Census: Motives, Tools and and Insights - Characterizing the Triggering Phenomenon in Wikipedia - Comparative Analysis of the Informativeness and Encyclopedic Style of the Popular Web Information Sources - Do less active participants make active participants more active? An examination of Chinese Wikipedia - Do We All Talk Before We Type?: Understanding Collaboration in Wikipedia Language Editions - Evaluating Wikipedia as a Source of Information for Disease Understanding - Neural Article Pair Modeling for Wikipedia Sub-article Matching - The Battle for Wikipedia: The New Age of ‘Lost Victories’? - The impact of news exposure on collective attention in the United States during the 2016 Zika epidemic - University Students in the Educational Field and Wikipedia Vandalism - What is the Commons Worth? Estimating the Value of Wikimedia Imagery by Observing Downstream Use Masssly, Tilman Bayer and Dario Taraborelli [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter

2 2

Anonymous editing
by Kevin G Crowston 21 Sep '18

21 Sep '18

Jonathan Cardy <werespielchequers(a)gmail.com<mailto:werespielchequers@gmail.com>> wrote: In case I didn’t make it clear, I am very much of the camp that IP editing is our lifeline, the way we recruit new members. Tangentially elated to this question, we have a forthcoming paper at the CSCW conference about how research conclusions change when anonymous work (e.g., IP editing) is taken into account. We looked at data from a citizen science project. Short answer: it makes a difference. The paper isn’t up on the ACM DL yet, but you can see it here: https://crowston.syr.edu/node/756 Doing the study requires access to IP addresses for logged in users, so someone at WMF would have to do the study for Wikipedia, which would be really interesting and would speak to the question of whether IP editing is a gateway to further editing. Kevin Crowston Associate Dean for Research, Distinguished Professor of Information Science School of Information Studies +1 (315) 443.1676<tel:+1%20(315)%20443.1676> crowston(a)syr.edu<mailto:crowston@syr.edu> 348 Hinds Hall, Syracuse, NY 13244 crowston.syr.edu <http://crowston.syr.edu/> Syracuse University Most recent publication: Kevin Crowston, Isabelle Fagnot. (2018). Stages of motivation for contributing user-generated content: A theory and empirical test. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 109, 89-101, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.08.005<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.08.005> . Check out our new research coordination network on Work in the Age of Intelligent Machine: http://waim.network/

4 3

[Wikimedia Research Showcase] Wednesday September 19, 2018 at 11:30 AM (PDT) 18:30 UTC
by Sarah R 20 Sep '18

20 Sep '18

Hi Everyone, The next Wikimedia Research Showcase will be live-streamed Wednesday, September 19 2018 at 11:30 AM (PDT) 18:30 UTC. YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OY8vZ6wES9o As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC at #wikimedia-research. And, you can watch our past research showcases here. <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Showcase#Upcoming_Showcase> Hope to see you there! This month's presentations is: The impact of news exposure on collective attention in the United States during the 2016 Zika epidemicBy *Michele Tizzoni, André Panisson, Daniela Paolotti, Ciro Cattuto*In recent years, many studies have drawn attention to the important role of collective awareness and human behaviour during epidemic outbreaks. A number of modelling efforts have investigated the interaction between the disease transmission dynamics and human behaviour change mediated by news coverage and by information spreading in the population. Yet, given the scarcity of data on public awareness during an epidemic, few studies have relied on empirical data. Here, we use fine-grained, geo-referenced data from three online sources - Wikipedia, the GDELT Project and the Internet Archive - to quantify population-scale information seeking about the 2016 Zika virus epidemic in the U.S., explicitly linking such behavioural signal to epidemiological data. Geo-localized Wikipedia pageview data reveal that visiting patterns of Zika-related pages in Wikipedia were highly synchronized across the United States and largely explained by exposure to national television broadcast. Contrary to the assumption of some theoretical models, news volume and Wikipedia visiting patterns were not significantly correlated with the magnitude or the extent of the epidemic. Attention to Zika, in terms of Zika-related Wikipedia pageviews, was high at the beginning of the outbreak, when public health agencies raised an international alert and triggered media coverage, but subsequently exhibited an activity profile that suggests nonlinear dependencies and memory effects in the relationship between information seeking, media pressure, and disease dynamics. This calls for a new and more general modelling framework to describe the interaction between media exposure, public awareness, and disease dynamics during epidemic outbreaks. Deliberation and resolution on WikipediaA case study of requests for commentsBy *Amy Zhang, Jane Im*Resolving disputes in a timely manner is crucial for any online production group. We present an analysis of Requests for Comments (RfCs), one of the main vehicles on Wikipedia for formally resolving a policy or content dispute. We collected an exhaustive dataset of 7,316 RfCs on English Wikipedia over the course of 7 years and conducted a qualitative and quantitative analysis into what issues affect the RfC process. Our analysis was informed by 10 interviews with frequent RfC closers. We found that a major issue affecting the RfC process is the prevalence of RfCs that could have benefited from formal closure but that linger indefinitely without one, with factors including participants' interest and expertise impacting the likelihood of resolution. From these findings, we developed a model that predicts whether -- Sarah R. Rodlund Technical Writer, Developer Advocacy <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Developer_Advocacy> srodlund(a)wikimedia.org

1 2

Fwd: Research about discretionary sanctions on ENWP
by Sydney Poore 19 Sep '18

19 Sep '18

From: Sydney Poore <spoore(a)wikimedia.org> To: Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> Cc: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Bcc: Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2018 16:20:40 -0400 Subject: Re: Research about discretionary sanctions on ENWP Hello Pine, You might want to record it in the IdeaLab to make sure that it considered for future reference when people are discussing ideas for research. Sydney On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 4:01 PM Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello colleagues, > > There is currently a small amount of discussion happening on an ENWP > arbitration page > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_…> > regarding what ENWP calls "discretionary sanctions > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary…>" > practices. Does anyone know of research regarding the effects, good and > bad, of the Arbcom authorization of discretionary sanctions? If not, then I > suggest that this be a topic of future research, particularly for > researchers involved with WMF's work on community health. > > Thank you, > > Pine > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) > -- Sydney Poore Trust and Safety Specialist Wikimedia Foundation Trust and Safety team; Anti-harassment tools team -- Sydney Poore Trust and Safety Specialist Wikimedia Foundation Trust and Safety team; Anti-harassment tools team

2 2

Research about discretionary sanctions on ENWP
by Pine W 19 Sep '18

19 Sep '18

Hello colleagues, There is currently a small amount of discussion happening on an ENWP arbitration page <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_…> regarding what ENWP calls "discretionary sanctions <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Discretionary…>" practices. Does anyone know of research regarding the effects, good and bad, of the Arbcom authorization of discretionary sanctions? If not, then I suggest that this be a topic of future research, particularly for researchers involved with WMF's work on community health. Thank you, Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )

1 0

where did I read about predicting user conflicts?
by Kerry Raymond 19 Sep '18

19 Sep '18

Some time in the last few months (possibly at Wikimania) someone pointed me at some research about predicting the outcome of Wikipedia consensus building from the language they were using in Talk. I think it was either research in progress or recently completed. As I recall, the main "take home" message was that discussions where "you" started to be used tended to end up in conflict and that discussions that avoided "you" were more likely to resolve amicably. If this rings any bells for you, can you please point me at it please. Thanks Kerry

4 4

Fwd: Results from 2018 global Wikimedia survey are published!
by Sydney Poore 18 Sep '18

18 Sep '18

From: Sydney Poore <spoore(a)wikimedia.org> To: Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> Cc: wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Bcc: Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 10:25:39 -0400 Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] Results from 2018 global Wikimedia survey are published! Hello Pine, Thanks for asking. I always will take the opportunity when given the chance to talk about the work that the Community health initiative, Trust & Safety, Legal, Research, Anti-Harassment Tools teams are doing around community health. :-) The work on Community health done by these teams is reflected in the Foundation's Annual Plan. Much of the work on community health is mentioned in the Community health CDP.1 But because community health is a large topic, other teams across the Foundation collaborate with these teams and also do work themselves directly or indirectly addressing community health. The CE Insights survey is a good example of that! Also, recently there was an Inspire Campaign about how to measure community health <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire> run by Community Resources team. 2 Speaking more directly to your comments, the Community health initiative has identified areas of focus that are related to the topics you mention. For example, early this fiscal year, a main focus is "Contributors and administrators are equipped with tools to make timely, informed decisions when harassment occurs." This builds on the work Antti-Harassment tools team began last year on the User Interaction Timeline tool and changes to Special:Block that add the ability for admins to do Partial blocks instead of site wide blocks. There is an on going discussion <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_health_initiative/Per-user_p…>with the community about how to design the new functionality into the tool. Currently this is a discussion about the best method to log partial blocks and the third set of designs are available for community feedback.3 Within the next week a discussion is going to start on Meta about how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This will involve be both a long term and short term research projects with potentially many opportunities for collaboration. Look for upcoming announcements for more information. Another focus early this year is working with the community to develop a Community Health Metrics kit that will allow communities to measure quantitative data and satisfaction levels over time, and identify areas for improvement. There is a consultation starting today <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_health_initiative/Metrics_kit>.4 Joe Sutherland is the lead on the project and will be making the announcements. We welcome comments and questions here, on wiki, and by private email about the work that is underway or in planning. Warm regards, Sydney 1 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_health_initiative/Annual_plan_FY1… 2 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire 3 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_health_initiative/Per-user_p… 4 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_health_initiative/Metrics_kit On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 2:25 PM Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Edward, I'm surprised that this thread only appears in my email under > Research-l, but I can see in the WMF mail archives that you sent the email > to other lists also. I wonder if that happened because you used bcc. Maybe > there is a bug in Gmail. On the topic of diversity research, thanks for the > link to the team reports. I'll put those on my list of things that would be > good to browse. > > Regarding the topic of harassment that the person with the email > "80hnhtv4agou" raised, I think that it's good to ask what more could and > should be done. My view is that WMF shouldn't be directly intervening in > community activities, but WMF support for community self-governance is > welcome with actions such as developing better moderation tools and > providing financial support to affiliates and community members who want to > develop evidence-based training modules. Sydney Poore is on the > Anti-Harrassment Tools team and I'm pinging her here to invite her to add > any comments that she has. > > Pine > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) > > > On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 5:45 PM Edward Galvez <egalvez(a)wikimedia.org> > wrote: > >> Thanks for your note Pine. I believe I have already shared this on >> Wikimedia-l; I haven't shared to Announce, so I can do that. >> >> "Diversity" is multifaceted. I think that some areas offer some hope (e.g. >> program organizers & affiliate organizers have higher proportion of women >> and geographic representation), others I am not uncertain whether we put a >> lot of attention (Education & Age), and in others we are seeing little >> progress (gender on the projects). And perhaps some aren't even on our >> radar. I think many teams are still working to understand what are the >> problems and possible levers that can help us to bring change to these >> measures. Some of those teams include Contributors/Audiences team, >> Anti-Harassment Tools, Trust & Safety and Community Resources. Each of >> these teams bringing their own strengths and angles to the problem. I >> invite you to read the team reports >> < >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_Insights/2018_Report/T… >> > >> . >> >> The research team is also working on finding a way to capture demographic >> data as well this year. While we gather this data through CE Insights it >> is >> not the most optimal way to measure demographic data. There was also the >> recent email by Erik Zachte about language diversity (Email subject: >> "Wikipedias, participation per language") Always to good to start to >> measure what you want to change. >> >> I also invite you (and perhaps everyone on this list) to reflect on: what >> numbers are most concerning for you related to diversity? What could you >> do >> to improve diversity on the projects? And decide how you would like to >> take >> action. >> >> Hope this helps! >> Edward >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 8:53 PM Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi Edward, >> > >> > Thanks for this publication. This research is likely to be of interest >> to >> > the WikimediaAnnounce-l (and by extension, Wikimedia-l) and Wikitech-l >> > subscribers, so I suggest that you cross-post this publication to those >> > lists. >> > >> > After reading this report, I have a question which may be challenging to >> > answer: what should we do to improve our diversity? Many of us, inside >> and >> > outside of WMF, have wanted to see progress on diversity metrics for >> years, >> > and I get the impression that while significant attention and resources >> are >> > being given to diversity, our progress has been disappointing. Perhaps >> > that's a subject that can be discussed further during the video >> > presentation, but I'd also be interested in hearing your comments here >> on >> > Research-l. >> > >> > Have a good weekend, >> > >> > Pine >> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 11:07 PM Edward Galvez <egalvez(a)wikimedia.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi everyone, >> > > >> > > I'm excited to share that our annual survey about Wikimedia >> communities >> > is >> > > now published! >> > > >> > > This survey included 170 questions and reaches over 4,000 community >> > > members across >> > > four audiences: Contributors, Affiliate organizers, Program >> Organizers, >> > and >> > > Volunteer Developers. This survey helps us hear from the experience of >> > > Wikimedians from across the movement so that teams are able to use >> > > community feedback in their planning and their work. This survey also >> > helps >> > > us learn about long term changes in communities, such as community >> health >> > > or demographics. >> > > >> > > The report is available on meta: >> > > >> > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_Insights/2018_Report >> > > >> > > For this survey, we worked with 11 teams to develop the questions. >> Once >> > the >> > > results were analyzed, we spent time with each team to help them >> > understand >> > > their results. Most teams have already identified how they will use >> the >> > > results to help improve their work to support you. >> > > >> > > The report could be useful for your work in the Wikimedia movement as >> > well! >> > > What are you learning from the data? Take some time to read the report >> > and >> > > share your feedback on the talk pages. We have also published a blog >> that >> > > you can read.[1] >> > > >> > > We are hosting a livestream presentation[2] on September 20 at 1600 >> UTC. >> > > Hope to see you there! >> > > >> > > Feel free to email me directly with any questions. >> > > >> > > All the best, >> > > Edward >> > > >> > > >> > > [1] >> > > >> > > >> > >> https://wikimediafoundation.org/2018/09/13/what-we-learned-surveying-4000-c… >> > > [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGQtWFP9Cjc >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Edward Galvez >> > > Evaluation Strategist, Surveys >> > > Learning & Evaluation >> > > Community Engagement >> > > Wikimedia Foundation >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Edward Galvez >> > > Evaluation Strategist, Surveys >> > > Learning & Evaluation >> > > Community Engagement >> > > Wikimedia Foundation >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Wiki-research-l mailing list >> > > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wiki-research-l mailing list >> > Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >> > >> >> >> -- >> Edward Galvez >> Evaluation Strategist, Surveys >> Learning & Evaluation >> Community Engagement >> Wikimedia Foundation >> _______________________________________________ >> Wiki-research-l mailing list >> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l >> > -- Sydney Poore Trust and Safety Specialist Wikimedia Foundation Trust and Safety team; Anti-harassment tools team -- Sydney Poore Trust and Safety Specialist Wikimedia Foundation Trust and Safety team; Anti-harassment tools team

1 0

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

Wiki-research-l